nwnfandomcom-20200213-history
User talk:Programmer
Hello World 09:33, 10 March 2008 (UTC) ---- Programmer, --The Krit 01:44, 11 March 2008 (UTC) ---- Alignments *Hello Programmer :Nice to see someone focusing on the alignments. But did you realize, that the texts you edited actually were the ingame descritions of these alignments? :Alignment interpretation imho is a very wide spread field. Many has been written about it before, and most of it still remains ones personal interpretation. :I think it would be best, to keep the original texts unharmed, and add additional explanations in a Notes section, as it is done in most articles. Your guidelines are also debatable. Oppinions differ, especially about what exactly "lawfull" means. So actually i am against strict guidelines in that case. maybe we could work this out as to be not that strict, and as to make clear, that these are personal and not official guidelines. :wellcome to the board :Gruftlord 16:28, 10 March 2008 (UTC) *Well, i guess i found your source: http://www.amaranthia.com/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=1092&forum=6 :The way i see it: these are guidelines made up by some DMs. well, maybe most DMs will agree to these guidelines. But i still think it sould be made clear, where they come from, and that they are personal oppinion, left to anyone own interpretation (the DMs don't have to follow them on every server you might end up for example) :Gruftlord 16:37, 10 March 2008 (UTC) :* I actualy used another source (http://www.geocities.com/vacred_dotal/align.htm#index) but they probably got it from another. You are correct that Alignment are often open to personal interpretations but I feel that is rather a reason to describe it better then to leave it to open to interpretations. Because the Alignment descriptions of the source give could be considered 'accepted', they qualify for this wiki I think. ::Alignment are at the core of the D&D roleplay expience and therefore deserve a more detailed description on the characteristics of an specific alinement. To help players in the often overlooked role playing aspect of game, I think the Guidelins are a helpfull ruleset which players can use to play in character. I know form personal experience it helped me, so why not others? Programmer 17:00, 10 March 2008 (UTC) ::*I agree, that it is a good thing, to add these here. but i think we should keep the original description unharmed, and add the rest as notes. additionally i think the guidelines should; although 'accepted'; be marked as personal opinion. maybe add the links to the source like in "real" wikis, so everyone can check himself where they come from, and if they agree with the author. Gruftlord 17:34, 10 March 2008 (UTC) ::*The manual of style says we should leave the BioWare descriptions intact. (I haven't looked at these new alignment descriptions yet, so I won't say more at the moment.) --The Krit 01:49, 11 March 2008 (UTC) :::* The manual of style, what is that? Programmer 12:09, 11 March 2008 (UTC) ::::* NWNWiki:Manual of style. It's linked to in the welcome message. --The Krit 16:37, 11 March 2008 (UTC) :* I don't like the lists of guidelines. They are not canon for NWN, and many of them are disputable. I think they should be deleted, but adding "external links" leading to your sources would be fine with me. :: The other additions to the alignment articles look reasonable, but I think we should keep the official BioWare descriptions intact, and add extra information afterwards. The casual reader doesn't need to be aware of where the BioWare description ends, but there should at least be a paragraph break there so editors can see which information should generally be left alone. What I've done in some articles (including alignment) is add a comment line to mark the end of the BioWare description, something like: ::: ::Mentioning the talk table index in this comment is probably a good idea, but only for those who know what the index is. --The Krit 15:53, 22 March 2008 (UTC) User page Your user page is a place for you to say something about yourself. People going there are probably looking for something other than this talk page, which is for messages to you (and your replies). It's probably better to leave your user page uncreated than to have it redirect to your talk page, so I went ahead and deleted the redirect. However, if you really think this talk page is a good description of you, feel free to recreate the redirect; I won't be presumptuous a second time. After all, in the end, it is your page. --The Krit 01:55, 11 March 2008 (UTC) New categories spell listed by level *Interesting idea but... that wont going to work, by example Balagarn's iron horn is a level 1 arcane spell for bard and a level 2 arcane spell for wizard/sorcerer. Same thing with Dismissal you catorise it Arcane Spells level 5 when bard has it at level 4 arcane spell. The spell list on class page does the job anyway. --User:ILKAY March 2008 :* I Have taken that into account. Programmer 06:59, 27 March 2008 (UTC) *I don't yet see the benefit to creating all these categories for spells by level. (They are listed by level in each spellcasting class' article.) If there's no benefit, it looks like clutter to me. If they are kept, though, you need to fix the names to match the naming conventions (specifically, only the first word of a category name gets capitalized, unless it contains a proper noun). --The Krit 06:26, 27 March 2008 (UTC) :* The problem however is that I don't know how to rename. Programmer 06:59, 27 March 2008 (UTC) ::*There is no easy way to rename a category. Basically, you'll have to create new categories following the established naming scheme, then blank out the contents from the old categories. :::Oh, and before you go through too much work, you might want to look at the discussion I recently started towards the bottom of Category talk:Spells. (I started it there instead of here because it's directed towards everyone.) --The Krit 10:12, 28 March 2008 (UTC) :::*3 new page and you keep dont following the established naming scheme :s You will have a lot of work for fix all link if you continue like that ILKAY 13:36, 4 April 2008 (UTC) ::::*I bet his next question is: 'What is this 'manual of style' you are referring to, and where can i find it?' :P Gruftlord 14:05, 4 April 2008 (UTC) *Once again, only the first word of a category name gets capitalized, unless it contains a proper noun. You are still adding categories that have the second word capitalized. --The Krit 14:26, 4 April 2008 (UTC) :*Well I added those tree pages to contine the existing style, I used for the other categories. I can't switch half way to a different convention can I? Then I rather first complete it the 'wrong' way end then rename them to the 'correct' name afterwards. Programmer 14:35, 4 April 2008 (UTC) ::*No, that is just additional work. You have to make a new category with the correct writing, change all the category enties for these spells and have the old category deleted. I think we should go with the Krits new template. that is a better overview, since it only uses 1 page, where you used 9 (which is a little less user-friendly) Gruftlord 14:42, 4 April 2008 (UTC) ::* Renaming a category takes as much work as creating it in the first place. Might as well do it right the first time. --The Krit 15:11, 4 April 2008 (UTC) :::*What happen with this project? wich is not finish ILKAY 18:26, 13 June 2008 (UTC) Main Page All edits to the Main Page are supposed to be proposed first on the talk page (as mentioned on the first line you see when editing the main page). --The Krit 05:52, 27 March 2008 (UTC) Plural redirects Please stop making redirects for plural forms of nouns. They are not necessary. You can get something like ranged weapons by typing "ranged weapons". --The Krit 11:29, 9 April 2008 (UTC) * Yes I know, but it is just convenient for searching purposes when you are redirect directly to ranged weapons when you type Ranged weapons in the search box Programmer 15:27, 9 April 2008 (UTC) *As far as i can see only the categories use plural forms, all the articles are in singular form. So why would one want search for plurals in the first place anyway? Gruftlord 16:45, 9 April 2008 (UTC) :* Well the plural form can sometimes fit better with cognitive indended subject. Let's say I want to know more about the types of ranged weapons in the game, then the first word that I intuitively would think of would be ranged weapons, not singular form, ranged weapon. Now for linguisticly technical reasons, you want to avoid the situation you get 2 or more pages on the same subject. That's were redirect comes in which fuction as a funnel, redirecting multiple intuitive request for information to the implemented technical sollution. By forcing userers to adapt to technical linguistic demand, you are basicly violating someone intuitive behaivior, which should be avoided at all time if possible. The result will be a more userfrindly wiki. Isn't that what we all want? Programmer 20:46, 9 April 2008 (UTC) ::*have you finally read the manual of style? there are no articles in plural form. i guess there were reasons to do so. and 'cognitive intuition' is a stupid argument. or otherwise i would make redirection pages for 'kickass'-> Fighter and 'pwnage'-> sorcerer ;P. :::*Keep it polite, please. --The Krit 22:40, 9 April 2008 (UTC) :::let's simply stick to the rules to keep things simple. if you are not satisfied with the rules, well maybe discuss a rulechange first. so far you have been busy changing lots of stuff recently, violating existing rules either while not knowing them (which you should have by reading the MoS; that is the reason The Krit links it for every new user) or by simply ignoring them. And others (like The Krit) have to clean up after you and delete a lot of false pages. :::that's one reason major projects sould be discussed first before getting busy. and making a 'plural redirect' for every page although plural articles are clearly not wanted IS a major project. Gruftlord 21:28, 9 April 2008 (UTC) ::*If you want to know more about the types of ranged weapons in the game, you're interested in the ranged weapons category, category:ranged weapons. If you're interested in knowing what a ranged weapon is, you're interested in the ranged weapon article, ranged weapon. The only real (linguistic) problem here is that searches do not cover categories by default. (You have to get to the "Search in namespaces" box that appears after conducting a search.) --The Krit 22:40, 9 April 2008 (UTC) ::* Well that doesn't sound very user friendly. Wouldn't it make sense if categories would be included in the initial search namespace by default? That way an initial search on ranged weapons would show the category:ranged weapons in the search result list. Programmer 07:37, 10 April 2008 (UTC) :::* That would make sense. People who are logged in can include categories in the initial search by changing their preferences. I don't know how (or if it's currently possible) to include categories in the default searches by people who are not logged in. --The Krit 07:45, 24 April 2008 (UTC) ::::~Maybe those Wikia-helpers could help us here? Could be they know how the search works, and how it can be changed. Gruftlord 14:51, 24 April 2008 (UTC) :::*Possibly. And I'm too busy with other things to look into this. --The Krit 20:11, 24 April 2008 (UTC) ::*Well, i have no idea how this wiki works (technically). But i could search the User-list for wikia-helpers and try to contact them, asking them kindly to help us (or change the searchengine on their own). Do i get an OK to do so? Gruftlord 20:47, 24 April 2008 (UTC) ::*There's nothing wrong with finding out how to do something. ;) If it is possible, I suggest proposing the change in NWNWiki talk:Community Portal to give others a chance to sound off on it before implementing it (since it would be a site-wide change). Some resources you might want to make use of are User:Kirkburn and/or w:Forum:Help desk. --The Krit 22:19, 24 April 2008 (UTC)